Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman says if Democrats move to cut off funding for U.S. troops, he'll switch to the GOP. That would end the Democrats' majority in the Senate and put Harry Reid back in the minority leader's office. Some may think there's no way he'll do that. But those are probably the same people that didn't think he'd run for re-election as an Independent after losing the Democratic primary.
That would be something, wouldn't it? Here you have the 2000 Democratic nominee for vice president talking about moving to the other side. He's already not really a Democrat...having continued to run for Senate after losing the Democratic primary in 2006. So why not make the switch? He is currently aligning himself with a political party that opposes the War On Terror and promotes a policy of Islamic terrorist appeasement.
If he doesn't change his mind, he'll be switching. Democrats aren't going to quit trying to stop the war in Iraq...and cutting off funding is the next logical step.
How about switching to the Libertarian Party?
__________________ "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." -Thomas Paine
So I said "Do you love me?" & she said, "No, but that's a really nice ski mask."
Back when the dems "won" the senate, I didn't really think they did because all the reps need is one more vote to tie and then Chenny breaks the tie and thus the reps control the senate. Back then I also noted this would happen because Lieberman said he would likely vote with the reps on Iraq war issues.
Looks like it may happen. The dems don't have the votes, even in their own party to cut funding. They need to stop talking about it or they'll shoot themselves in the foot. Stupid really, Bush is the CIC and will have his way in Iraq till he's out of office. Iraq is his baby, they should let him have it and take all the credit for whatever happens if they are smart.
Boysda, ain't it the truth what I speak here? really, the dems would be better off leaving this thing to Bush, one way or the other?
A man of principle is a rarity in Washington these days. Having said that, I have no reason to believe that Lieberman is not prepared to fight fire with fire.
A man of principle is a rarity in Washington these days. Having said that, I have no reason to believe that Lieberman is not prepared to fight fire with fire.
Trudat!
If they vote straight party lines in the senate and Leibermann votes with the reps, its a tie and Chenny will break it - Reps win.
And the dems just "thought" they had control. I'd love to see Chenny break a tie.
I believe a person who is elected by running as a member of a political party should be forced to stay in that party until his term is completed. I didn't like it when Jeffords did it in '00, and it won't make it any more right if Lieberman does it now.
That said, Lieberman is one of the very few Democrats who I like. It has nothing to do with his stance on the war; I admired him before the war began because he's a man of principle who stands firm on his beliefs and doesn't change with the wind. His current stance on Iraq just reaffirms my opinion of him.
If the Democrats try to cut funding for the war, they're going to sorely regret it. There's no way that they can come out of that one with their image of "oppose the war but support the troops" intact. Clinton has made it clear that if the votes are there, it'll go to a vote. I have no respect for her or the other Democrats doing the current pushing for a funding cut and I'll have no respect for any politician, regardless of party affiliation, who votes for such a thing.
__________________
We must be the change we wish to see in the world -- Ghandi
http://www.rightminded.net
I believe a person who is elected by running as a member of a political party should be forced to stay in that party until his term is completed. I didn't like it when Jeffords did it in '00, and it won't make it any more right if Lieberman does it now.
That's not very democratic of you, Ben, no pun intended. Lieberman's an independent, so does that mean who be excluded from a party membership under your terms? I thought it was pretty clear he was finished with the Democrats this past election, and I don't see this as switching parties.
Quote:
That said, Lieberman is one of the very few Democrats who I like. It has nothing to do with his stance on the war; I admired him before the war began because he's a man of principle who stands firm on his beliefs and doesn't change with the wind. His current stance on Iraq just reaffirms my opinion of him.
Yep.
Quote:
If the Democrats try to cut funding for the war, they're going to sorely regret it. There's no way that they can come out of that one with their image of "oppose the war but support the troops" intact. Clinton has made it clear that if the votes are there, it'll go to a vote. I have no respect for her or the other Democrats doing the current pushing for a funding cut and I'll have no respect for any politician, regardless of party affiliation, who votes for such a thing.
Yeah, no kidding. It's amazing how blindly over-confident some people are. Every presidential election (as far as I can remember) is full of drama more so than the last. You think '00 and '04 were something to watching? Wait until '08...
I don't think Lieberman would be exactly switching parties. As I recall, the Dems tossed him overboard before the last election and he ran and won as an Indpendent.
Aught and CR, you guys have a point. But I look at it this way: If he was running as a Republican, how many people who voted for him as an independent would have still voted for him as a Republican?
I don't necessarily vote party lines, but the reason I didn't vote for Harold Ford, Jr. for Senate in Tennessee last fall was because I didn't want to help the Democrats get control of the Senate. Had Ford run as an independent, I would've voted for him. If he had then changed to a Democrat, I would've been very pissed. Let's face it: In American politics, as with many other cultures' politics, we vote for the party as much as the person.
__________________
We must be the change we wish to see in the world -- Ghandi
http://www.rightminded.net
I don't think Lieberman would be exactly switching parties. As I recall, the Dems tossed him overboard before the last election and he ran and won as an Indpendent.
He has been caucusing with the Democrats though, if he decided to go with the Republicans it"™s a power shift.
__________________ "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." -Thomas Paine
So I said "Do you love me?" & she said, "No, but that's a really nice ski mask."
Lieberman Might Switch Parties
